Also, just like most psychopaths, Dexter is incredibly charming and a master of concealment. Think of all those serial killers who manage to kill over and over, undetected. Not all psychopaths are as intelligent as Dexter , though. A psychopath with violent tendencies, a poor upbringing and limited education might end up as a thug or an enforcer for a criminal gang. An intelligent, violent one with a good education might end up as a top CEO, a lawyer, or a serial killer.
Our leading man is a serial killer. He constantly obsesses and dialogues with his dead adoptive father. He keeps blood slides and murder weapons and consistently deceives the people around him in order to rack up body counts. The show's very premise inspired protests from groups such as the Parents Television Council. We see Dexter's mania manifesting virtually every week.
Consider this week's episode: "I need to kill him," Dexter Morgan says. He pants, holds a knife, stares down at an ex-con's body. The vision of Harry chides Dexter and points out the holes in his logic. Dexter stops but is furious. He realizes the man wasn't responsible for the abduction of the young woman named Lumen Pierce Julia Stiles.
The scene chills precisely because it reveals the psychological damage motivating the show's title character, whether in the form of voices or his willingness to inflict lethal violence. It is difficult, however, to define the word happiness.
We say that it is something that brings pleasure, whether it is physical or intellectual. John Stuart Mill believed in a hierarchy of pleasures — such that intellectual pleasure is superior Driver — but for our purposes, the type of pleasure is irrelevant as it is the same across the board in all cases I discuss.
Unhappiness is subsequently defined as when one is killed and therefore robbed of their life and future. One could say that Dexter violates the greatest happiness principle because, by killing his victims, he is causing them unhappiness. By taking their lives, he is erasing their chance at a future altogether, which is a scary and undesirable thing to happen to anyone. The unhappiness of his victims is worth something — but it is important that we remember what is different about Dexter, and what is different about his victims.
The people whose unhappiness he is causing are killers themselves. We are forced to consider that, as awful as it may sound, the death of this person could actually create happiness in a cascading chain of events.
He was a scamming and wealthy coyote that transported illegal immigrants from Cuba and, upon arrival, raised the price of transport.
If the family was unable to pay, Castillo imprisoned or murdered the individual or family. It is horrific to imagine how many more innocent people would have been murdered or had their wealth stolen if Dexter allowed him to continue.
Think of it this way: killing Castillo spared dozens of innocent lives, such that entire families never had their money stolen, and had a chance at starting a happy life instead of being killed or robbed blind. It is undeniable that the saved lives, futures, and happiness of all of these innocent individuals that Castillo would have abused or killed far outweighs the happiness that a single bad man lost in his death. Therefore, the murder of Castillo was a morally good thing to do.
Mill, however, seems to accept act utilitarianism, which stipulates that breaking a rule is not immoral when following the rule would be suboptimal Brink.
Essentially, this means that generalized rule-following cannot be wholly equated to morality; even if an action is against the rules, it is okay to break the rule if the most morally sound course of action requires doing so. This is exactly what Dexter is about. He frequently breaks rules, because the morally correct course of action, killing murderers, requires that he do so.
Having rules, especially in the context of society, definitely has its merits — it allows us to describe what is right and what is wrong without taking everything on a case-by-case basis, and it allows us to write law.
But there are cases in which it seems completely illogical and even foolish to follow the rules. It is as if rule utilitarianism is assuming the world can be seen in black and white, rather than shades of gray, which is a big misconception — as is evidenced by the very nature of this topic. To believe there are never blurs in the lines between right and wrong is to misunderstand the way life works. And so, all things considered, act utilitarianism appears as a much sounder theory.
Therefore, Dexter may not quite live up to rule utilitarianism — but in light of act utilitarianism, which is arguably superior, his actions are morally permissible. Therefore, a punishment is justified to the extent that it does the most for the common good Kelly. The punishments that Dexter doles out do just this — as elaborated on earlier, he saves dozens of lives at the cost of one. Share on Whatsapp.
Share on Mail. Share on LinkedIn. Subscribe No Thanks. Dear Reader, please register to read gulfnews. Register to read and get full access to gulfnews.
Create your account or login if you already have one. First name is required. Last name is required. Please enter a valid email address. Password should have minimum 7 characters with at least one letter and number.
Passwords do not match. Please enter your email address.
0コメント